If you have business in Dayton, Akron, or Des Moines this year, your finance team may need to approve a larger travel line. A fresh analysis of 128 million airfares across US cities in April shows that secondary and tertiary markets are bearing the brunt of post-pandemic pricing pressure, with some routes running 42% higher than last year.
The trend runs counter to the recovery narrative that business travel would snap back uniformly. It hasn't. The mechanics behind this divergence matter for anyone booking flights to smaller destinations.
What's Driving the Numbers
CheapAir.com's annual airfare study, released this week, found that average fares in smaller markets climbed faster than in major hubs. The range is striking: Manchester-Boston Regional Airport saw a 14% year-over-year increase, while Dayton International Airport logged a 42% jump.
A separate report from Airlines Reporting Corp confirmed the broader pattern. Average US airfare rose 45% year-over-year in April—the highest level in seven years.
| Metric | Value |
|---|---|
| Fares analyzed by CheapAir.com | 128 million US airfares in April |
| Dayton International Airport | 42% increase |
| Manchester-Boston Regional Airport | 14% increase |
| National average increase (ARC) | 45%, highest since 2017 |
Why Airlines Are Pulling Back From Small Markets
The reasons are structural, not temporary. During the pandemic, carriers slashed regional capacity dramatically and have been slow to restore it. When travel demand returned, airlines prioritized routes to larger markets where they could fill planes more predictably.
United Airlines CEO Scott Kirby addressed this directly during an April earnings call. The airline is operating "dramatically fewer regional aircraft than in 2019" and expects no improvement over the next few years. United has retired roughly 150 regional planes, a reduction Kirby described as permanent.
American Airlines announced cuts to several smaller markets last November. Delta has pulled service from ten regional destinations. Des Moines, which appears in multiple analyses of the hardest-hit cities, has seen fares climb alongside these reductions.
The pilot shortage compounds the problem. All three major carriers—along with Southwest, JetBlue, and Alaska—have cited pilot hiring challenges as a factor in schedule cuts. Alaska Airlines added another wrinkle this week: its pilots' union voted to authorize a strike if contract negotiations fail. That could further constrain capacity in markets the airline serves.
Our Analysis: Who Wins and Who Loses
The beneficiaries are clear: airlines running fewer but fuller flights to major hubs. Higher fares on reduced supply mean better unit economics even if total passengers decline.
The losers are businesses that rely on regional travel. Manufacturers with facilities in second-tier cities, consultants servicing clients outside metro areas, and any organization with distributed operations face higher costs and fewer flight options. The combination of price increases and reduced frequency makes trip planning harder.
There's also a geographic equity issue. Larger metros typically have multiple carrier options, creating price competition. Smaller markets often have one or two carriers controlling most routes. When those airlines cut back, travelers have nowhere to turn.
What remains unclear is how durable this imbalance is. Airlines have strong incentives to restore regional capacity if pilot supply eases and business travel fully recovers. But neither seems imminent. Corporate travel budgets are still being scrutinized more tightly than before the pandemic.
The trade-off forces hard decisions. Say you run a mid-size firm with offices in Dayton and Chicago. Booking Chicago flights is straightforward—you have options, and prices, while elevated, are competitive. Booking Dayton means dealing with a compressed schedule and a fare that may have doubled. Your choices narrow: absorb the cost, drive, or consolidate trips. None of these is ideal, and it points to a structural shift that reshapes how companies think about regional presence.
What to Watch Next
Watch pilot staffing trends and contract negotiations at Alaska and other carriers. A resolution could signal the beginning of capacity restoration. Also monitor whether legacy regional carriers can scale operations faster than the majors.
For now, expect elevated fares and limited schedules in smaller markets through at least 2025. Budget accordingly, and build flexibility into travel policies that cover these routes.
Key takeaways
- Regional airfare increases are outpacing major hubs by a significant margin, with some cities seeing 40%+ year-over-year jumps
- Carrier route cuts in smaller markets appear structural, not temporary—airlines are consolidating around higher-yield hub routes
- Business travelers to secondary markets face both higher costs and reduced scheduling flexibility
- Pilot shortages remain a binding constraint on capacity recovery across the regional network
- Travel policies covering smaller destinations should be reviewed and budgeted with these dynamics in mind
Frequently asked questions
Which smaller cities are seeing the sharpest airfare increases?
According to CheapAir.com's analysis, Dayton International Airport recorded one of the highest increases at 42% year-over-year, alongside Des Moines and Akron, Ohio.
Why are fares rising faster in small markets than in major hubs?
Airlines cut regional capacity more aggressively during the pandemic and have been slower to restore it. Combined with pilot shortages, this creates supply constraints that push prices higher in markets with fewer flight options.
Is this situation likely to improve soon?
United Airlines has indicated it does not expect improvement in regional capacity over the next few years. The broader pilot shortage and ongoing business travel demand recovery suggest elevated fares in smaller markets may persist.
How do pilot shortages specifically affect smaller routes?
All major carriers have cited pilot hiring challenges as a reason for schedule reductions. Regional routes often rely on specific pilot pools, and when those are depleted, airlines cannot operate as many flights regardless of demand.
What can businesses do if they have frequent travel needs to smaller cities?
Consider trip consolidation to reduce the number of flights, build larger travel budgets for affected routes, and evaluate whether alternative transportation modes or regional carrier partnerships make sense for specific corridors.